9 comments:

Almost forgot about ol' Jeb. Haven't noticed him much in the news lately, except to note that he's gained some serious weight. I think he's too closely linked to W to have a serious chance (simply because of the boredom factor), but maybe the next generation will produce another one, like maybe George P. Bush. Here's a thought: Palin and P. Bush on the "Blow Dry" ticket for 2012. Never say never. "P" (for Prescott, very blue-blood) very conveniently joined the Navy Reserve in 2007, which might have been with an eye on establishing military cred for a future political run. Born in '76, so he'll be just barely old enough for 2012 too. I'd keep an eye on this guy.

Getting back to W's rehabilitation. All of his supporters that I know (and there are A LOT!) never did desert him, and have in fact already mentally shifted all of his shortcomings onto Obama (and THEN SOME!). Add to that the fact that Obama has been a miserable sellout failure, and I think the dem brand has been seriously and unalterably diminished for at least another generation, very possibly for good. With that in mind, the only enemy the Repubes have for the foreseeable future is themselves, which, as it turns out, is a pretty formidable obstacle indeed.

The upside for MOMCOM of course, is that they benefit no matter who is in office, because the marketing campaign has been an unqualified and overwhelming success. "All war, all of the time" has proven to be a concept that Americans across the political spectrum (well, excluding them nut bag lefties, and who listens to them anyway?) can embrace, so I guess we're just gonna have to play this one out and see where it takes us. Bankruptcy and isolation would be my guess, but who knows?

And lest we forget, here's another Texas guv'na who might have even more pure star appeal than Bush ever did: Rick Perry. If he can attract the money and stays out of PR trouble in the meantime he'll be real factor. He and Palin would make a most photogenic ticket as well, although I can't imagine either one accepting second billing. Palin definitely wants to be first chair this time around and would likely only want a lackey for VP, although the financiers always have the final word on such things.

The right has some serious arrows in their quiver with regard to discrediting global warming.

1. They know the public, like a frightened little child, doesn't want to believe in it in the first place, because the consequences, if true, are simply terrifying, and because dealing with it will be economically disruptive, at least in the short term.

2. The science of it is hard to grasp, and no one can say definitively exactly what the consequences will be, when we can expect them to occur, or when it will be absolutely too late to prevent them. Unsurety creates doubt which creates apathy in the mind of a dumbed down American electorate, many of whom are either un or underemployed, and worried about more pressing issues.

3. The magnitude of the change required to halt present accumulations of greenhouse gasses is simply enormous(!), with most of it not even under the control of the US. The inclination to say that its not even our problem would certainly rear its ugly head if serious climate change initiatives ever were to gain traction here in the US.

In the end, just like a prosecution, the burden of proof lies on the global warming scientists and supporters, while the deniers only have to plant a seed of doubt to win their case. Therefore, I feel safe in predicting that climate change will be largely ignored (it'll be paid some small amount of lip service) until the impacts are simply undeniable, at which time dealing with them will be a moot point, and the triage (the elimination of the remaining underclasses) will begin. I have no doubt whatsoever that these plans are already being made as we speak, and, once again, dovetail nicely with MOMCOM's current strategies in the Middle East and elsewhere.

"The right has some serious arrows in their quiver with regard to discrediting global warming" ... etc. etc. etc.

In other words they think they are committing ecocide for everyone but themselves, which is the ultimate narcissism.

It is like a home invasion where the terrorists who have taken over the home are constantly watched by their victims in one way, the victims are constantly watched by the terrorists in a different way, but there is a secret bomb going to go off that neither knows about.

In other words the fly in the "oinkment" of pig MOMCOM is that ecocide includes the terrorists, ie, MOMCOM.

So the arrows they have in their quiver will end up in their back (this reality gives new meaning to "we have your back").

The survivors (remote folks around the globe) will be the next civilization, MOMCOM won't, so the stink of their stupidity rises to high heaven.

It is like a bunch of stupid little piglets who took over one room in a swine slaughterhouse, then called it the universe, until the slaughterhouse workers got back from lunch and 'splained' things to them.

Randy,Agent Orange - I like that one! Very fitting, although it looks like he's heard the ridicule and has toned it down a little lately. He's still a goof, bawling on camera the other day and other such nonsense. An "exaggerated sense of self importance" is the term they use for guys like him I think, but then again, the same goes for most of the nut cases we're sending up there these days (and in the case of Caribou Barbie, will be contemplating sending all too shortly).

(c) Copyright

All original material is copyrighted by Dredd Blog. You may quote or use the material so long as there is a link back to Dredd Blog for every post you use. This is, among other things, to verify that no Dredd Blog text was changed. It must remain the same, no editing. Note that Dredd Blog has no commercial purpose. If it so happens that Dredd Blog may quote copyrighted material from other writers, it is only for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research."Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

--the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

--the nature of the copyrighted work;

--the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;

--and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors." (17 U.S. Code § 107)